Steve Lillywhite says "NLOTH" was 'failure'

[Salome]

I love No Line ...
my favourite U2 album

but it didn't capture the general public the way U2 aims for
so as a U2 product it is a bit of a failure

 

[Cactus Annie]

If the band thought that the album would be mainstream, then they were misguided. However the singles were OK.

You know how after all these years with working with Laonis they have only just started calling him Dan instead of Danniel, and listed him as Dan on NLOTH's credits. Do you think there's anything sinister going on? My mind is racing with all these thoughts now.

 

[65980]

Lanois had a terrible motorcycle crash last summer. How that is going to affect the way that Larry addresses him behind closed doors is anyone's guess....

 

[Cactus Annie]

On the credits for NLOTH he is referred to as Dan. On all the previous albums he is called Danniel. Why is that?

 

[corianderstem]

Maybe they said "Hey, Danny - do you want to be Dan, Danny or Daniel in the credits?"

And he said "Whatever. Call me Ishmael for all I care."

I don't know why you think there's anything to be read behind it.

 

[65980]

No, I think Cactus Annie is onto something. This may yet determine the direction of U2's next record.

What's more, Bono may soon be shortening his name even more to "Bon". And Edge will become "Ed".

The record company is already sh***ing bricks over the potential confusion with Bon Scott and Van Halen.

 

[Cactus Annie]

And I also agree with Acrobat when I read his/her post that Bono deliberately post-ponded his back surgery for 21st May 2010!

 

[corianderstem]

Oh, don't start with that horse-pocky.

 

[Galeongirl]

Yeah, he totally post ponded it Cori!! Why can't you see it?

And 9/11 was totally Bush's idea.

 

[Salome]

Bush's idea.

that's obviously a lie

 

[BVS]

And I also agree with Acrobat when I read his/her post that Bono deliberately post-ponded his back surgery for 21st May 2010!

You and Acrobat have been proven wrong time and time again, at least he's admitted it...

 

[nirniva]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qru8jSxhqLc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dzoxj8wz9Os


(Even if you watch no other segment of these videos, please, please start the second video at about the six-minute mark. The guy making this starts analyzing the deep metaphorical meaning of Bono's dancing. It is beautiful.)

 

[corianderstem]

that's obviously a lie

Ha!

 

[Galeongirl]

that's obviously a lie

Oh snap! Good point.

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

can we please get back on topic? thanks.

 

[peter88823]

Musically it is certainly not a failure.

It maybe a failure in sales, but NLOTH is one of the U2 albums I own as a CD.

I wonder why did they choose Crazy and Boots as singles???? I would choose No Line and Breathe instead.

 

[quiv]

Answer:



So either all their 80's stuff sounds the same, or BD has some hell of a quilt-work sound.

The "TOUCH ME" riff has the same sound as live "I Will Follow".

The Gibson explorer was used and a similar if not the same amplification setup was used.

It is the same sound and intentionally so. REHASH

We can talk guitar and theory all day if you want as well.

 

[BVS]

The "TOUCH ME" riff has the same sound as live "I Will Follow".

The Gibson explorer was used and a similar if not the same amplification setup was used.

It is the same sound and intentionally so. REHASH

We can talk guitar and theory all day if you want as well.

The acoustic sound Neil Young used in the 70's has a similar if not same sound he used on his latest album.

Rehash?

















If we're counting the same guitar "sound" as a rehash then we're stretching and every guitarist is a rehasher.

 

[65980]

BVS, sometimes you need to just accept the fact that other people's opinions aren't always yours. It's not that big of a deal. It's good to debate, but there's a point where you can just give it up.

 

[65980]

(Addendem to above): Lest you take it the wrong way and we start mutually flaming again, let it be clear that I did not mean the above post as a bitch-slap. I'm just offering a suggestion that might make your life here easier.

 

[shart1780]

U2 care way too much about sales. U2 could be experimental as much they want and they'll always sell a buttload. They'll always be millionaires. The very fact that they'd alter the music they make to make more money means that they've sold out to a point. They seem to be more concerned w/ being recognized by everyone than being recognized as artistically original.

 

[Rachel D.]

U2 care way too much about sales. U2 could be experimental as much they want and they'll always sell a buttload. They'll always be millionaires. The very fact that they'd alter the music they make to make more money means that they've sold out to a point. They seem to be more concerned w/ being recognized by everyone than being recognized as artistically original.

It's true.

 

[Vlad n U 2]

You people can be a very miserable bunch most much of the time.

 

[quiv]

The acoustic sound Neil Young used in the 70's has a similar if not same sound he used on his latest album.

Rehash?



If we're counting the same guitar "sound" as a rehash then we're stretching and every guitarist is a rehasher.

 

[jaques]

Just like after pop mart, I think they will try to make things smaller and more intimate after 360, just like ATYCLB/Elevation. It would probably be welcomed by most fans. They don't need to prove anything more now, everything has already been proven. Both next album and next tour I guess will be "small-scale".

 

[mama cass]

Just like after pop mart, I think they will try to make things smaller and more intimate after 360, just like ATYCLB/Elevation. It would probably be welcomed by most fans. They don't need to prove anything more now, everything has already been proven. Both next album and next tour I guess will be "small-scale".

that would be nice!

i really loved the scale of the Elevation tour...

 

[Inner El Guapo]

You people can be a very miserable bunch most much of the time.

The only thing miserable about it is that U2 making so many of their most devoted fans say this kind of stuff. We aren't here to rip on U2, we're here to discuss what is going on. Sometimes the truth hurts.

U2 (read: spokesman Bono) have always said that "selling out" was doing something you didn't want to do, for money. I agree with that definition.

But U2's escape clause is that they are doing it for 'relevance'.
I don't think they are only doing it for money, but they have to be commercial whores in order to become as relevant as their giant insecure ego craves. It's the only way to attain it and rub shoulders with the garbage on the charts.

And how do they do it? They compromise their music, over and over again.
You can't say they haven't, their own words tell us they are changing the music, for a very specific reason. Now if you substitute "money" for relevance in the above definition about "selling out", because it's the only real way to attain that relevance, then what are we talking about?

We're talking about a band that would write an entire album and then scrap it (rewrite it, fire the producer) and then follow that album up with another that was delayed for six months (specifically stated by the band) for "hits" or "singles" (etc.) because it wasn't going to sell enough to keep them relevant.

This is their escape clause for the excuse-making brigade around here.
"They just want to be loved..." Yeah, they don't need the money, they aren't in it for the money (I and almost everyone else agrees) but they have an ambition that requires creative/artistic compromise. It's plain as day.

I can understand that it seems "miserable" to bitch and moan about it (especially if U2 is still firmly on your same 'wavelength') but it is a pretty big deal on a forum like this, a forum where the sole purpose is to discuss U2's music. And look at the thread title...it's not like people are talking about this on one of the many "U2 can essentially do no wrong" threads.

 

[Inner El Guapo]

FTR, I think NLOTH is as good of a U2 album certainly since POP and maybe since Zooropa. I don't think people are crazy to say it's their best since Achtung. But I disagree.

But it's impossible to ignore the idea that U2 could do so many things, so many things, and NLOTH could have been so different, so much better, had they just had confidence enough to say "this is who we are and what we're all about".

NLOTH could only be a "failure" because people like Steve Lillywhite, Jimmy Iovine, Dan Lanois, Larry Mullen, Adam Clayton, Paul McGuiness, and most likely (in part) Edge and Bono want U2 to get on an award stage and have people tell them how much they love them. They want to have a song that teenagers play on their Ipods. This is not how most maturing acts behave. You don't think Springsteen or Bowie would want the same thing? You don't think they have the same kind of ego that craves this very same relevance? I'm sure they do...but they try to let the music do the talking. They make it, put it out there and if people bite, then they bite. U2 are far too contrived about it.

You could argue they are more honest about it, I could buy that, but it's still pretty disappointing. All that said, I am still excited about whatever new music they offer. I just don't defend the band from criticism anymore. People say to me "are you still a huge U2 fan?" and I say, "not as much as I used to be." If it were as simple as the reason being "I don't like the newest music that much" then that's cool...but it's not as simple as that.
I don't think they've "sold out"...I just think it's a complete shame what has happened to the band that once had the biggest brass set of balls in music. They've become that uncomfortable aging rock act that doesn't quite 'get it'. It's perfectly okay to not be the 'hottest thing going' But as long as people like Lillywhite have U2's attentive ear, why would it change? Would be segments of the fanbase be any less miserable?

Sorry guys...had to rant a little bit.

 

[rjhbonovox]

U2 care way too much about sales. U2 could be experimental as much they want and they'll always sell a buttload. They'll always be millionaires. The very fact that they'd alter the music they make to make more money means that they've sold out to a point. They seem to be more concerned w/ being recognized by everyone than being recognized as artistically original.

Absolutely. Super post and well put!

As for the above argument that I started with my "Beautiful Day classic 80's sound rehash" comment...... good to see it still being debated hehehe.

 

[Rachel D.]

I agree that U2 care too much about sales and popularity and that they could probably grow creatively if they stopped caring about that so much, but I still like them as much as I always have and I think NLOTH is awesome.

With a band like U2 that changes so much, it's important not to get too hung up on one era. I think that's the problem for a lot of people who are unhappy with the newer music. The 80s are over, the 90s are over, and U2 have grown and transformed in order to continue succeeding as a band. For me, there's always something interesting to listen to in U2's large catalogue and that's why I rarely get tired of them. I don't really know what point I'm trying to make here, but it's just a thought in the midst of this NLOTH discussion.